heap of indigested quotations from common books, of good and. of bad authority-inartificially cemented together by a loose and angry commentary. We are not aware, indeed, that there are in this part of the work either any new statements, or any new views or opinions; the facts being mostly taken from Chalmers's Annals, and Burke's European Settlements; and the authorities for the good conduct and ill treatment of the colonies, being chiefly the Parliamentary Debates and Brougham's Colonial Policy. -But, in good truth, these historical recollections will go but a little way in determining that great practical and most important question, which it is Mr W.'s intention, as well as ours, to discuss-What are, and what ought to be, the Dispositions of England and America towards each other?-And the general facts as to the origin and colonial history of the latter, in so far as they bear upon this question, really do not admit of much dispute. The most important of their settlements were unquestionably founded by the friends of civil and religious libertywho, though somewhat precise and puritanical, were, in the main, a sturdy and sagacious race of people, not readily to be cajoled out of the blessings they had sought through so many sacrifices, and ready at all times manfully and resolutely to assert them against all invaders. As to the mother country, again, without claiming for her any romantic tenderness or generosity towards throse hardy offsets, we think we may say, that she oppressed and domineered over them much less than any other modern nation has done over such settlements-that she allowed them, for the most part, liberal charters and constitutions, and was kind enough to leave them very much to themselves; and although she did manifest, now and then, a disposition to encroach on their privileges, their rights were, on the whole, very tolerably respected-so that they grew up to a state of prosperity, and a familiarity with freedom, in all its divisions, which was not only without parallel in any similar establishment, but probably could not have been attained had they been earlier left to their own guidance and protection. This is all that we ask for England, on a review of her colonial policy, and her conduct before the war; and this, we think, no candid and well-informed person can reasonably refuse her.

As to the war itself, the motives in which it originated, and the spirit in which it was carried on, it cannot now be necessary to say any thing-or, at least, when we say that having once been begun, we think that it terminated as the friends of Justice and Liberty must have wished it to terminate, we conceive that Mr W. can require no other explanation. That this result, however, should have left a soreness upon both sides, and especi

ally on that which had not been soothed by success, is what all men must have expected. But, upon the whole, we firmly be lieve, that this was far slighter and less durable than has generally been imagined; and was likely very speedily to have been entirely effaced by those ancient recollections of kindness and kindred which could not fail to recur, and by that still more powerful feeling, to which every day was likely to add strength, of their common interests as free and as commercial countries, and of the substantial conformity of their national character, and of their sentiments, upon most topics of public and of private right. The healing operation, however, of these causes was unfortunately thwarted and retarded by the heats that rose out of the French revolution, and the new interests and new relations which it appeared for a time to create :-And the hostilities in which we were at last involved with America herself-though the opinions of her people, as well as our own, were deeply divided upon both questions-served still further to embitter the general feeling, and to keep alive the memory of animosities that should not have been so long remembered. At last came peace -and the spirit, but not the prosperity of peace; and the distresses and commercial embarrassments of both countries threw both into bad humour, and unfortunately hurried both into a system of jealous and illiberal policy, by which that bad humour was aggravated, and received an unfortunate direction.

In this exasperated state of the national temper, and, we do think, too much under its influence, Mr Walsh has thought himself called upon to vindicate his country from the aspersions of English writers; and after arraigning them, generally, of the most incredible ignorance, and atrocious malignity, he proceeds to state, that the EDINBURGH and QUARTERLY Reviews, in particular, have been incessantly labouring to traduce the character of America, and have lately broken out into such excesses of obloquy,' as can no longer be endured; and, in particular, that the prospect of a large emigration to the United States has thrown us all into such paroxysms of spite and jealousy, that we have engaged in a scheme of systematic defamation that sets truth and consistency alike at defiance. To counteract this nefarious scheme, Mr W. has taken the field-not so much to refute or to retort-not for the purpose of pointing out our errors, or exposing our unfairness, but, rather, if we understand him aright, of retaliating on us the abuse we have been so long pouring on others. In his preface, accordingly, he fairly a vows it to be his intention to act on the offensive-to carry the war into the enemy's quarters, and to make reprisals upon the honour and character of England, in revenge for the insults

government to be that of a pretty pure and unincumbered Mo narchy, supported by a vast revenue and a powerful army, and obeyed by a people just enlightened enough to be orderly and industrious, but noway curious as to questions of right—and never presuming to judge of the conduct of their superiors.

Now, it is quite true that this Party dislikes America, and is apt enough to decry and insult her. Its adherents never have forgiven the success of her war of independence-the loss of a nominal sovereignty, or perhaps of a real power of vexing and oppressing her supposed rivalry in trade-and, above all, the happiness and tranquillity which she enjoys under a republican form of government. Such a spectacle of democratical prosperity is unspeakably mortifying to their high monarchical principles, and is easily imagined to be dangerous to their security. Their first wish, and, for a time, their darling hope, was, that the infant States would quarrel among themselves, and be thankful to be again received under our protection, as a refuge from military despotism. Since that hope was lost, it would have satisfied them to find that their republican institutions had made them poor and turbulent and depraved-incapable of civil wisdom, regardless of national honour, and as intractable to their own elected rulers as they had been to their hereditary sovereign. To those who were capable of such wishes and such expectations, it is easy to conceive, that the happiness and good order of the United States-the wisdom and authority of their government-and the unparalleled rapidity of their progress in wealth, population and refinement, must have been but an ungrateful spectacle; and most especially, that the splendid and steady success of the freest and most popular form of government that ever was established in the world, must have struck the most lively alarm into the hearts of all those who were anxious to have it believed that the People could never interfere in politics but to their ruin, and that the smallest addition to the democratical influence, recognised in the theory at least of the British Constitution, must lead to the immediate destruction of peace and property, morality and religion.

That there are journals in this country, and journals too of great and deserved reputation in other respects, who have spoken the language of the party we have now described, and that in a tone of singular intemperance and offence, we most readily admit. But need we tell Mr W. or any ordinarily well inform ed individual of his countrymen, that neither this party nor their journalists can be allowed to stand for the People of England?-that it is notorious that there is among that people another and a far more numerous party, whose sentiments are

at all points opposed to those of the former, and who are, by necessary consequence, friends to America, and to all that Americans most value in their character and institutions ?-who, as Englishmen, are more proud to have great and glorious nations descended from them, than to have discontented colonies uselessly subjected to their caprice-who, as Freemen, rejoice to see freedom spreading itself, with giant footsteps, over the fairest regions of the earth, and nations flourishing exactly in proportion as they are free-and to know that when the drivelling advocates of hierarchy and legitimacy vent their paltry sophistries with some shadow of plausibility on the history of the Old World, they can turn with decisive triumph, to the unequivocal example of the New-and demonstrate the unspeakable advantages of free government, by the unprecedented prosperity of America? Such persons, too, can be as little suspected of entertaining any jealousy of the commercial prosperity of the Americans as of their political freedom; since it requires but a very moderate share of understanding to see, that the advantages of trade must always be mutual and reciprocal-that one great trading country is of necessity the best customer to another-and that the trade of America, consisting chiefly in the exportation of raw produce and the importation of manufactured commodities, is, of all others, the most beneficial to a country like England.

That such sentiments were naturally to be expected in a country circumstanced like England, no thinking man will deny. But Mr Walsh has been himself among us, and was, we have reason to believe, no idle or incurious observer of our men and cities; and we appeal with confidence to him, whether these were not the prevailing sentiments among the intelligent and well educated of every degree! If he thinks as we do, as to their soundness and importance, he must also believe that they will sooner or later influence the conduct even of our Court and Cabinet. But, in the mean time, the fact is certain, that the opposite sentiments are confined to a very small portion of the people of Great Britain-though now placed unfortunately in a situation to exercise a great influence in her councils-and that the course of events, as well as the force of reason, is every day bringing them more and more into discredit. Where then, we would ask, is the justice or the policy of seeking to render a quarrel National, when the cause of quarrel is only with an inconsiderable and declining party of its members?-and why labour to excite animosity against a whole people, the majority, of whom must be your sincere friends, merely because some prejudiced or interested persons among them have disgusted the great body of their own countrymen, by the senselessness and scurrility of their attacks upon yours?